cannabisnews.com: Ottawa Must Decide What To Do About Pot





Ottawa Must Decide What To Do About Pot
Posted by CN Staff on April 29, 2003 at 09:42:30 PT
Editorial
Source: St. Catharines Standard
There are persuasive arguments in favour of legalizing marijuana for the personal use of patients who could benefit from it. We have argued for years that the drug should be made available for those patients who cannot keep food down, who have no appetite or who suffer from multiple sclerosis, cancer, arthritis or AIDS. But it’s hard for us to agree that the production of legal grass for seriously ill patients should be run by the government. 
Not with its poor track record. Those who favour legalized grass often argue the government should regulate marijuana production, tax the product and distribute it much in the way the LCBO distributes alcoholic beverages. They hold out the promise of huge tax revenues as a way of convincing politicians and bureaucrats who worry about Reefer Madness on our street corners. But only last week we commented on the fact the federal government’s $5.7-million grow operation in an unused mine in Flin Flon, Manitoba, was six months behind schedule, its marijuana crop was unuseable and none of the 250 kilograms harvested would reach the patients whose suffering it might ease. This year’s crop is much more potent than last year’s — but too potent to use — and the operation failed to grow a mild placebo version of the plant to be tested in blind trials. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/omd.htm Source: Standard, The (St. Catharines, CN ON)Published: Tuesday, April 29, 2003Copyright: 2003 St. Catharines StandardContact: pbailey scs.southam.caWebsite: http://www.canada.com/stcatharines/Related Articles & Web Site:Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmCanada Rethinks Medical Marijuana Laws http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16079.shtmlMedical Pot Firm Mulls Legal Action Over Delayshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16063.shtmlIs Canada Going To Pot?http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15037.shtmlWe Make Our Own Laws in Canada http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15032.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by FoM on April 29, 2003 at 20:41:12 PT
Just A Note
I want to add that when I said we are making a difference I meant everyone who is working hard and hopeful that change will come. All the organizations and all the people who do their part day after day are those I was referring to. As long as we can stand together, work together and do our own different projects we will really win. I saw a picture from Gary's pictures at the NORML Conference that I really liked. Here it is.http://www.immly.org/images/immly_SF_2003/23_4J_wh_dp.jpgI just want to thank everyone who is a part of this large and growing community. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by FoM on April 29, 2003 at 13:27:11 PT
Richard! 
I hope people do write to the papers. I believe that writing letters to the editor is very important. I hope that CNews helps inspire writers. I hope people are learning. I know I learn something new every day. We are a wonderful, compassionate community and are doing our best to help bring change. It's hard to believe that we could make any steps towards reform in our current political climate but WE ARE! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Richard Lake on April 29, 2003 at 12:57:31 PT:
Please Support Canadian Cannabis Law Reform 
You have undoubtedly seen the many articles from the Canadian press being posted to CNEWS. While I know that CNEWS does not focus on writing Letters to the Editor like MAP does, Canadians are hoping that some of you will help them by doing just that.Philippe Lucas, the owner of the Compassion Club in Victoria, BC, Canada has just written and distributed a request for more letters to the Canadian press which may be seen at:http://www.mapinc.org/alert/0265.htmlYour help will be greatly appreciated!Richardp.s. Ethan, I have always believed that the cannabis being grown at Flin Flon is very useable, probably better quality than the average Canadian grow-op.The firm growing the cannabis knows what it is doing. It is not their first effort at growing produce in a mine. It is a hard rock mine, in a long unused area with no dust - and no evidence at all of minerals getting into the cannabis I have seen a few worry about.I am glad to see that the firm is now going to sue the government, as the firm did it right, and the Canadian government's failure to deliver their quality cannabis to patients is the real crime - which is unfairly making the firm look bad.To potent to use? Give me a break!
An alert requesting Letters to the Canadian media
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by afterburner on April 29, 2003 at 11:10:47 PT:
Legal Canadian Cannabis Production.
Prairie Plant Systems http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/16/thread16012.shtml is legally producing cannabis in Flin Flon, Manitoba, Canada for the Canadian federal government. Cannabis production is a legal business under government permission and contract. Can NAFTA protection be far behind? One agreement, three amigos: Canada, USA, and Mexico.North American Free Trade Agreement http://www-tech.mit.edu/Bulletins/nafta.htmlPART TWO
               TRADE IN GOODS
                Chapter Three       National Treatment and Market Access for Goods http://www-tech.mit.edu/Bulletins/Nafta/03.market           Subchapter A - National Treatment
Article 301: National Treatment1.  Each Party shall accord national treatment to the goods of another Party in accordance with Article III of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),....2.  The provisions of paragraph 1 regarding national treatment shall mean, with respect to a province or state, 
treatment no less favorable than the most favorable treatment accorded by such province or state to any like, directly competitive or substitutable goods, as the case may be, of the Party of which it forms a part.Since cannabis is now sold in Canada in the absence of a viable federal law and is legally grown by government-sanctioned business contract, cannabis becomes a NAFTA commodity and is covered by the "most favorable treatment" clause of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Thus, the Great State of California must receive most favorable treatment equivalent to the treatment currently in place in the Province of Ontario, where cannabis is legal, and in the Province of Manitoba where an island of legal cannabis production exists -- not to mention the Canadian government-sanctioned Province of British Columbia grow houses http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/15/thread15642.shtml for production of medical grade cannabis for amelioration of cannabis-eased illness and "?scientific research?". California has provided for Compassionate Use and Production of cannabis under state law. The US federal government has acknowledged by charging Ed Rosenthal as a businessman that cannabis production is a business, and as such it is protected by NAFTA.ego transcendence follows ego destruction, and suddenly there is no question.World Trade Agreement 1994 (establishing the WTO and including GATT Uruguay 1994)  The World Trade Organization 
 Preface 
 l.General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/wta.1994/World Trade Organization - 
URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENT - 
Agreement on Agriculture - Annex 1: Product Coverage http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/14-ag_02_e.htm#annI1.     This Agreement shall cover the following products:(i) 
 HS Chapters 1 to 24 less fish and fish products, plus* 
 
(ii) 
 ....
 
 HS Heading 
 33.01 
 (essential oils) 
 
 ....
 
 HS Headings 
 52.01 to 52.03 
 (raw cotton, waste and cotton carded or combed) 
 
 
 HS Heading 
 53.01 
 (raw flax) 
 
 
 HS Heading 
 53.02 
 (raw hemp) Prairie Plant Systems appeal path (if necessary): Canada, NAFTA, WTO under GATT.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Ethan Russo MD on April 29, 2003 at 09:56:19 PT:
Yes and No
This article has good and bad points. However, do you believe that the Flin Flon product is unusable? Or, could Health Canada be buying time? Could that be why Prairie Plant Systems is now suing for defamation? I know what I think.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on April 29, 2003 at 09:54:31 PT:
The Rest---
In other words, two years and millions of dollars later, the operation is a huge flop. We find it curious the crop the government was growing was never intended for use by the suffering. Health Canada wants to test it first to see if there is any scientific proof that marijuana eases patients’ discomfort. But if that is the case, why then did the government issue permits to 36 Canadians allowing them to legally grow marijuana or to designate a grower to supply them with an “untested” drug? If the government isn’t sure use of marijuana makes life easier for those patients, why permit these people to grow it and the patients to use it? On the other hand, if Ottawa wants to test the efficacy of marijuana, why not use the grass these people are already successfully growing, rather than waste $5.7 million on a project in Flin Flon that has failed two years in a row? Not only are these 36 Canadians successfully growing marijuana, Eric Nash and his wife Wendy Little of Duncan, B.C., have even had their crop officially certified as 100 per cent organic. If ordinary people can succeed at producing medically usable pot that is organically grown, why can’t the government? If the government cannot succeed at it, despite spending millions on the project, it should scrap its grow operation and test the marijuana from the growers who are intending it for use by these patients. Our federal politicians have to evolve their marijuana policies to blend with the public’s views on how grass should be used and when its use should be penalized. So far, there’s been too much contradictory regulation and confusion that has only worsened the situation. It’s time for Ottawa to either grow or get off the pot. 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment